It’s time to start talking about Mike Rhoades’ future at VCU.

rvaram

Elite Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Posts
4,063
Likes
6,388
and you seem like you support the thread and hope our coach is gone soon.
If we’re only making the tournament once every 4 years or worse, yes I would want Rhoades gone. Imo, between this year and next year we have to go dancing once and I don’t think that’s a crazy ask. Would be 3 ncaas in 7 years and with our resources, conference, etc. I think this is a fair ask. Any less and we might as well have Chris Mooney.
 

Mistachill

Elite Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Posts
18,492
Likes
31,645
and you seem like you support the thread and hope our coach is gone soon.
Thread title: "It’s time to start talking about Mike Rhoades’ future at VCU." Yes, I support that.

"Hope our coach is gone soon" - show me a single post of mine reflecting that.

You on the other hand seem to support that seasons where we miss the NCAAs are enjoyable seasons, which is fine. It's a position I don't share, but who am I to define what constitutes an enjoyable season for you.
 

Mistachill

Elite Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Posts
18,492
Likes
31,645
If that were to happen, that's the time to start the thread. This sort of thing is for the off-season. Starting it in December was ridiculous.
I respectfully disagree. With the way last season ended, with where we were in December likely throwing away our at-large chances...nothing wrong examining the state of the program considering we now have to thread a needle to reach our primary goal for this season. The fact that our season comes down to a weekend in Brooklyn with no margin for error, I absolutely don't think this thread is ridiculous.

I sincerely hope by mid-March we look back and laugh at this thread, but pretending that it isn't legit? I can't co-sign on that.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Posts
3,498
Likes
3,640
What I think is fascinating is Shaka and Wade got so much heat during their tenures but the players not so much. Maybe a few of them. Which funny in hindsight because those teams brought us our greatest success statistically. Then there’s been a shift where the players are being blamed under Rhoades but not the coaches. Like it’s always the players aren’t executing the plan properly. I’m just curious when that shift in blame changed tenure wise.

“Shaka can’t coach proper defense. Only pressing.”

“Shaka can’t make adjustments. Only has one plan”

“I thought Wade was a X’s and O’s guy.”

Now it’s

“Why can’t these guys execute the plan?”

It’s just interesting how when we struggle now the focus is the players not the coach anymore.
 
Last edited:

HBK

Elite Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Posts
6,333
Likes
13,698
What I think is fascinating is Shaka and Wade got so much heat during their tenures but the players not so much. Maybe a few of them. Which funny in hindsight because those teams brought us our greatest success statistically. Then there’s been a shift where the players are being blamed under Rhoades but not the coaches. Like it’s always the players aren’t executing the plan properly. I’m just curious when that shift in blame changed tenure wise.

“Shaka can’t coach proper defense. Only pressing.”

“Shaka can’t make adjustments. Only has one plan”

“I thought Wade was a X’s and O’s guy.”

Now it’s

“Why can’t these guys execute the plan?”

It’s just interesting how when we struggle now the focus is the players not the coach anymore.
Respectfully, please don’t lump me into that category. I don’t know about everyone else, but I’ve always been consistent: when it comes to bad things that happen on the floor during the game, most of the time the problem is execution or mental lapses, and that’s almost always on the players. Conversely, the players are the ones who make the plays to win games, and they should be acknowledged for doing so. Players play and coaches coach.

The thing to remember about this in context is that the kids aren’t robots and will never do it perfectly. It is OK because that’s life. Plus, the other teams we play have coaches who scout and game plan, and presumably they have players who want to win just as much as VCU players.
 
Last edited:

2012Ram

Elite Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Posts
16,851
Likes
49,658
What I think is fascinating is Shaka and Wade got so much heat during their tenures but the players not so much. Maybe a few of them. Which funny in hindsight because those teams brought us our greatest success statistically. Then there’s been a shift where the players are being blamed under Rhoades but not the coaches. Like it’s always the players aren’t executing the plan properly. I’m just curious when that shift in blame changed tenure wise.

“Shaka can’t coach proper defense. Only pressing.”

“Shaka can’t make adjustments. Only has one plan”

“I thought Wade was a X’s and O’s guy.”

Now it’s

“Why can’t these guys execute the plan?”

It’s just interesting how when we struggle now the focus is the players not the coach anymore.
Mike is a good dude, and could potentially be a lifer here. For some people that will blind to a number of shortcomings in other departments should they appear. And because people want to be rational or think of themselves as rational they'll place blame elsewhere.

The same is true, but inverse, for folks that aren't that huge a fan of Rhoades or don't care if he'll be here for life.

As always the truth is somewhere in the middle
 

HBK

Elite Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Posts
6,333
Likes
13,698
I respectfully disagree. With the way last season ended, with where we were in December likely throwing away our at-large chances...nothing wrong examining the state of the program considering we now have to thread a needle to reach our primary goal for this season. The fact that our season comes down to a weekend in Brooklyn with no margin for error, I absolutely don't think this thread is ridiculous.

I sincerely hope by mid-March we look back and laugh at this thread, but pretending that it isn't legit? I can't co-sign on that.
Let’s keep our respectful disagreements going for a moment. We did go 19-6 over the final 25 games we played last season, which is a winning percentage of 78%. Admittedly, we were a disappointing 1-3 in the last 4. It wasn’t like those last three losses were to bad teams. We lost at SLU, who was I think, a game back of us in the standings. We lost to UR, the eventual A10 tournament champion, who beat a Big 10 team in the NCAAs; and we lost at an ACC school, Wake, in the NIT. We weren’t losing to awful teams, which is the point. Beating good teams is hard, and we came up short. We were still a bubble team being considered for an at-large, which is a credit to the players and staff after starting 3-4 last season.

Was it disappointing to miss the NCAAs? Absolutely, especially on the heels of the Covid problem that robbed us of a game in 2021. However, making the NIT as a #3 seed wasn’t a disaster with the way the season started. Plenty of traditional NCAA teams play in the NIT from time-to-time. Virginia went last season. Calipari had Kentucky in the NIT the year after they win the National title.

Now to be clear, because there are posters on RamNation who take major liberties and infer things that aren’t there, I’m not saying I’d be happy with a string of NIT appearances. I’ve made my expectations clear in other posts, so I won’t rehash it here.

To your bigger point about this thread, sure it is legitimate to speak about a coach’s future, particularly given the turnover we’ve had this century. This is a fan forum, after all, and for better or worse, almost anything is fair game.
 

HBK

Elite Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Posts
6,333
Likes
13,698
As always the truth is somewhere in the middle
I say this with complete respect. That may be my favorite sentence that you‘ve ever posted. Truer words were never spoken, as it relates to sports fans and politics.
 

Ramaholic

Elite Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Posts
1,583
Likes
5,200
Let’s keep our respectful disagreements going for a moment. We did go 19-6 over the final 25 games we played last season, which is a winning percentage of 78%. Admittedly, we were a disappointing 1-3 in the last 4. It wasn’t like those last three losses were to bad teams. We lost at SLU, who was I think, a game back of us in the standings. We lost to UR, the eventual A10 tournament champion, who beat a Big 10 team in the NCAAs; and we lost at an ACC school, Wake, in the NIT. We weren’t losing to awful teams, which is the point. Beating good teams is hard, and we came up short. We were still a bubble team being considered for an at-large, which is a credit to the players and staff after starting 3-4 last season.

Was it disappointing to miss the NCAAs? Absolutely, especially on the heels of the Covid problem that robbed us of a game in 2021. However, making the NIT as a #3 seed wasn’t a disaster with the way the season started. Plenty of traditional NCAA teams play in the NIT from time-to-time. Virginia went last season. Calipari had Kentucky in the NIT the year after they win the National title.

Now to be clear, because there are posters on RamNation who take major liberties and infer things that aren’t there, I’m not saying I’d be happy with a string of NIT appearances. I’ve made my expectations clear in other posts, so I won’t rehash it here.

To your bigger point about this thread, sure it is legitimate to speak about a coach’s future, particularly given the turnover we’ve had this century. This is a fan forum, after all, and for better or worse, almost anything is fair game.
I agree MR had a solid season. But we fell apart at the end. The way we lost to SLU and UR was very concerning. There is no excuse to show up (or rather not show up) to season defining, end of season games like that. Those games were over in the first half.
I give credit to MR for having us in tournament discussion for most the year and blame for having 2 bites at the apple at the end of the year and losing twice in similar fashion where we get pounced on early.
 
Last edited:

mrgeode

Top Tuna
Elite Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2013
Posts
11,166
Likes
24,240
I respectfully disagree. With the way last season ended, with where we were in December likely throwing away our at-large chances...nothing wrong examining the state of the program considering we now have to thread a needle to reach our primary goal for this season. The fact that our season comes down to a weekend in Brooklyn with no margin for error, I absolutely don't think this thread is ridiculous.

I sincerely hope by mid-March we look back and laugh at this thread, but pretending that it isn't legit? I can't co-sign on that.
That's the thing, delving into all this, especially when you have a clearly preferred outcome (not you, Heel) before the season actually ends is kinda like listening to only half a trial. I mean, the original title was "It's Time For Mike Rhoades to Go". Whether it's borne out later or not that's an absurd thing to advocate for barely a month into a season.

I have no problem having a conversation about where folks feel the program is and where we want it to go, I just think a rush to judgement is almost always a bad idea. It's a long season and basketball is a game of runs. Best to let them play out before diving into the box score and advanced metrics.
 
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Posts
1,153
Likes
1,543
I don't understand the thinking that a new coach would be able to meet the "expectations" of many posters right away the 1st year or 2nd year. There would be many factors involved. I expect many players would transfer, recruits would change commitment, and it would have to start over. Is there a P5 coach who would switch to VCU without being fired? Is there a non-P5 coach who would choose VCU over a P5 job? So my question is where are we going to get a coach that will meet everyone’s expectations right away. I was frustrated that we were not playing well early as there were just too many bad plays on O & D. I yelled at TV many times with WTF are they doing. IMHO – the coaches and players were out of sync. It appears that this has improved. Beat g-moo tonight. Go Rams Go.
 

duncanlamb

Elite Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Posts
21,882
Likes
25,808
It’s just interesting how when we struggle now the focus is the players not the coach anymore.

What?? 🤦‍♂️

17-18, the entire forum criticized Mike Rhoades for a team that played matador defense which routinely allowed open 3's and layup lines to the basket. You has posters here who lamented the end of havoc as we know.

19-20, the entire forum hammered Rhoades for not benching the senior laden starting lineup and allowing the team to collapse at the end of the season.

A large portion of the forum spent multiple seasons criticizing Rhoades for perceived substandard rrecruiting. 2012 and I went back and forth on this for 3 years and partially resulted in a recruiting forum. The criticism only stopped 2 years ago.

Rhoades has been criticized over 5 years for having a big man coach and not giving him anyone coordinated or strong enough to develop a consistent low post threat.

He's been roundly criticized for throwing teams on the court which turn the over the ball at sm elite pace.

He's was criticized early on for bringing in weak prospects thru the transfer portal. This is the first year it appears he effectively utilized it.

This is an entire thread dedicated to evaluating his performance to determine if he should be fired at the end of the season.

Shall I go on?
 
Last edited:
Top